Citation Nr: 0637400
Decision Date: 12/04/06 Archive Date: 12/12/06
DOCKET NO. 04-14 804 ) DATE
)
)
On appeal from the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in
Indianapolis, Indiana
THE ISSUES
1. Entitlement to service connection for a right wrist
disorder.
2. Entitlement to service connection for a left hip
disorder.
3. Entitlement to a higher initial rating for residual scar,
fractured tailbone, 0 percent disabling (noncompensable).
REPRESENTATION
Appellant represented by: Disabled American Veterans
ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD
Kevin L. Bickel, Associate Counsel
INTRODUCTION
The veteran served on active duty from January 1978 to
January 1983 and an unverified period of service in the Air
Force Reserve.
This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals
(Board) on appeal from a June 2003 rating decision of the
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in
Indianapolis, Indiana, which, in pertinent part, granted
service connection for residual scar, fracture tailbone, with
a 0 percent disability rating effective December 4, 2002,
denied service connection for right wrist pain, and denied
service connection for left hip pain.
The Board has recharacterized the veteran's claims to more
accurately reflect the conditions for which she is claiming
service connection.
In the January 2005 Statement of Accredited Representative
and an April 2004 Statement in Support of Claim, the veteran
appears to be raising a claim for entitlement to service
connection for the residuals of fractured tailbone. In the
April 2004 statement the veteran reported: "It is not just
the scar on my tailbone, but residuals of fractured tailbone
that is on the original 21-526 that I am making a claim."
This claim has not been addressed by the agency of original
jurisdiction. Accordingly, it is referred to the RO for
action deemed appropriate.
The appeal is REMANDED to the RO via the Appeals Management
Center (AMC), in Washington, DC. VA will notify the veteran
if further action is required on her part.
REMAND
In the veteran's VA Form 9, Appeal To Board Of Veterans'
Appeals, dated April 2004, the veteran indicated that she
wanted a Board hearing at a local VA office. She also
requested a local hearing. A local hearing was scheduled for
November 2004, which the veteran responded that she did not
want. The veteran has not, however, withdrawn her request for
a hearing before the Board. Given the expressed intent of
the veteran to attend an in-person hearing at the RO, the
Board concludes that this case must be returned to the RO to
arrange for a Travel Board hearing. 38 U.S.C.A. § 7107 (West
2002); 38 C.F.R. §§ 19.75, 19.76, 20.703, 20.704 (2006).
Accordingly, the case is REMANDED to the AMC for the
following action:
A Travel Board hearing should be
scheduled for the veteran in connection
with her appeal. After the hearing is
conducted, the case should be returned to
the Board, in accordance with appellate
procedures.
The veteran has the right to submit additional evidence and
argument on the matter or matters the Board has remanded.
Kutscherousky v. West, 12 Vet. App. 369 (1999).
This claim must be afforded expeditious treatment. The law
requires that all claims that are remanded by the Board of
Veterans' Appeals or by the United States Court of Appeals
for Veterans Claims for additional development or other
appropriate
action must be handled in an expeditious manner. See 38
U.S.C.A. §§ 5109B, 7112 (West Supp. 2005).
_________________________________________________
MICHELLE L. KANE
Veterans Law Judge, Board of Veterans' Appeals
Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7252 (West 2002), only a decision of the
Board of Veterans' Appeals is appealable to the United States
Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. This remand is in the
nature of a preliminary order and does not constitute a
decision of the Board on the merits of your appeal.
38 C.F.R. § 20.1100(b) (2006).